The Left is out to do away with our civil rights. It is simple: If you have the right to bear arms, you are a citizen. If you do not have that right, you are a subject. VOTE THEM OUT OF THE SENATE & CONGRESS THIS NOV. 5
posted on 10/20/2002 1:14:26 PM PDT
I'm a verb.
posted on 10/20/2002 1:16:40 PM PDT
The home defense weapon should be a nice little shotgun,the .38 is the conceal and carry weapon. This is all mote. Gun control is and never has been about guns,its PEOPLE CONTROL that these laws are targeted at
Ginni Wolf, executive director of Marylanders Against Handgun Abuse declared that the Beltway Sniper
Odd that a gun grabbing organization with "handgun" abuse is railing against a person with a rifle. They should have a more accurate name of "Marylanders Against the 2nd Amendment"
I was with the article till this line:
If one of them, just one, had been armed, odds are the sniper's murderous rampage would have ended right there.
Armed citizenery is good for multiple killings at one place, ie someone with a machine gun or knife trying to kill dozens and is standing there doing so. With a suddent shot and taking off a typical CCW person isn't going to be able to do much. I think this was in the book "More Guns, Less Crime"
posted on 10/20/2002 1:43:01 PM PDT
"Those who argue, during this time of war on our own soil, that Americans should be disarmed, are naïve, irresponsible and promoting arguments which are ultimately fatally dangerous, not only for human life but for liberty itself. "
Agree absolutely. If bearing arms ultimately makes the people an enemy of the statists (not of legitimate government), by default, the statists force the people to view them as enemies of the people.
The only thing I could add is the fact that even if the Second Amendment was not written into the Constitution, the right to self-defense and bearing arms is still the choice of the invididual -- not government. It's simple logic.
posted on 10/20/2002 1:44:06 PM PDT
Tammy Bruce is a former president of the Los Angeles chapter of NOW
I can see why.
I guess being pro-abort, lesbian, and pro-2nd Amendment doesn't cut it with the fem-nazi crowd.
To: CHACHI; Ramius
I love to side on the side of self-defense, but what this woman is proposing is not a reasonable argument for concealed carry.
The rapist victimizing a community is an argument for concealed carry. The home invader is a situation for concealed carry. The mugger/slasher in the dark parking lot is a situation for concealed carry... our sniper is not.
The victims don't even know they are in the sights until they are down. I can't defend myself against something I can't see.
And the witnesses? - Well, unless the witness is real close to the sniper (and the sniper has not been that careless so far) when he aims and fires, a witness is not likely to be able to take out the now-fleeing sniper in a vehicle from a long ways away with a handgun. And if they try, who knows what is downrange.
I can sell home defense to the populace easily, and concealed carry for situations where I find myself relatively alone with an attacker away from home... but not situations where I am trying to use a handgun to be a hero in a busy populated street against an escaping sniper.
It is the wrong tool for that job. Carry anyway, we could get lucky, but so far this sniper has not been the kind of target a handgun in the purse would have stopped, and I think this idea is too open to criticism by the Brady Bunch.
Are you the author of this? I didn't realize this was just a message on a Yahoo board. I thought it to be a published article.
This free American citizen is voting ALL liberals out! The Second Amendment stands - and don't forget, it was meant to keep liberal government officials who might want to take over America, at bay. Criminals can always be shot dead if they enter your home. And they won't, if they think you may be armed.
posted on 10/20/2002 7:04:19 PM PDT
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson